I have been informed that Mr. Sheaffer is being given the option of either resigning from the Florida Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers or being expelled.
So I only have one question Mr. Sheaffer, was it worth it?
So I only have one question Mr. Sheaffer, was it worth it?
Was it worth sullying your reputation among every criminal defense lawyer in the state just so Kathy Belich could get a story? Was it worth having your claims of “professionalism” published on Mr. Boedeker’s blog on the same day you sold out an entire organization.
You may be an Internet sensation and a media darling, but you are a disgrace to your colleagues. Good job.
You may me an Internet sensation and a media darling, but you are a disgrace to your colleagues. Good job.
And for those that are interested, I did verify that Mr. Sheaffer lied to obtain the seminar materials. Apparently FACDL was concerned that the audio would be leaked, so they set up a system to stream the audio.
Mr. Sheaffer called FACDL headquarters and claimed he was having a hard time hearing the audio and would like to have a copy sent to him. He went so far as to say he needed it so that he could maintain his death penalty qualifications.
FACDL believed Mr. Sheaffer and sent him the audio as he requested – he immediately turned it over to Ms. Belich. The rest is history – just like his reputation among his colleagues.
The rest is history – just like his reputation among his colleagues.
As a side-note, I was informed that when this situation was brought to the attention of the News Director for WFTV-ABC, he was the consummate professional and removed all references at the request of FACDL. I would like to not only commend him for that, I would like to say thank you.
I would like to say thank you.
And some people still don’t understand why there are WARS.
I just don’t understand the purpose of verbal bashing, or responding with more verbal bashing. If I set out to bash someone for stating their opinion, I personally would feel like a “horses ass” if that person refrained & came back at me with a thoughtful, articulate rebuttal to my bashing.
I personally do not agree with Mr. Hornsby’s opinion concerning the “Lyons,Shaeffer,Belich” issue, but I do respect that he has been nice enough to respond to my questions. Even if I didn’t feel some of the responses completely answered my questions, at least the questions were aknowledged.
I would prefer to try to understand the process of someone’s perception & how they formed their opinion, since I haven’t walked in anyone’s shoes but my own.
How did I get brought into this?
Mr. Hornsby, IF any of this is true can you please explain and give your opinion? TIA
http://www.examiner.com/examiner/x-14615-Spokane-Homicide-Examiner~y2009m11d25-Orlando-Florida-Is-Jose-Baez-suborning-perjury
@Anti-MD
Wow, what a sensationalized story. I think the accuracy of that story can be sunned up from a quote it had: “purely conjecture based on the information supplied by one anonymous source.”
First off, it is my understanding that Marti Mackenzie no longer works for Baez. So who would have the media contacts to set up paid network interviews for the witnesses – this theory is up there with the lone gunman theory.
And I would like some statutory citations to the felony for putting false information into a court file. I have never heard of that one.
As for his sources that are worried about their livelihood, he only has like three employees in his firm. How hard could it be to figure out who the source is?
Mr. Hornsby: Thank you for standing up for right and wrong! Regardless of all the bashing you’ve received, I want to thank you for your posts regarding this case. It’s really hard for a regular person like myself to know the difference between true information and mis-information; however, you have provided a lot of law to back up your statements. I’m really tired of all the anti-Casey/Defense sentiments and sites and am glad to finally find a site where the information provided is non-biased, no-nonsense. I want to read and hear facts not fiction as most do. I share your opinion of Mr. Sheaffer and his sidekick!
My question here is… in your opinion what could be the impact on this case by the leaked material? I personally think the whole thing is blown out of proportion by the haters but am concerned about the impact on Casey getting a fair trial.
Yes WFTV had a Good November…. They report first and the best of Truth!!!!
Embellish is also a claim Defense Lawyer Ms Lyon says to do in her teachings also.. I listened to the whole speach.. she did… IMO.
@Finally
Because the materials were recalled so quickly it will have little effect on the trial.
However, if the materials had been allowed to linger out there and make their way onto Nancy Grace and Issues with Jane, the effect would have been noticeable.
@Jeansee
I <3 Embellish
Sorry for the spelling errors… I was in such a hurry that I didn’t proof-read before posting!!
Mr. Hornsby, thank you for your response. Unfortunately, just because WFTV-ABC removed all references to this story doesn’t illuminate all the other media outlets from still running with it. In fact, there’s still a lot of information still out on the web regarding this material including audio on youtube, Blinkoncrime.com, orlandosentinel.com just to name a few. With that in mind, how could this kind of information affect the case? If it were to affect the case, would there be an appeal option available due to the lack of a fair trial?
True historian you are… and True lawyer and possible politician ? LOL Thank You sir for you insights and responses..
Mr.Hornsby… what is your take on all these motions filed last minute 11/25/2009 by Lyon and Baez?
11/25/2009 Motion
to Declare Florida Statute Section 921.141 Unconstitutional Under Ring vs. Arizona
11/25/2009 Memorandum of Law
in Support of Defendant’s Motion to Declare Florida Statute 921.141 Unconstitutional Under Ring vs. Arizona
11/25/2009 Motion
to Declare Fla. Stat. 921.141(5)(h) and/or the Standard (5)(h) Jury Instruction Unconstitutional Facially and as Applied
11/25/2009 Memorandum
Supporting Motion to Declare Fla. Stat. 921.141(5)(h) and/or the Standard (5)(h) Jury instruction Unconstitutional Facially and as Applied
11/25/2009 Motion
to Declare Section 921.141(5)(d) Florida Statute and/or the Section 921.141(5)(d) Standard Instruction Unconstitutional Facially and as Applied and to Preclude their Application at Bar
11/25/2009 Memorandum
of Law in Support of Defendant’s Motion to Declare Section 921.141(5)(d) Florida Statute and/or the Section 921.141(5)(d) Standard Instruction Unconstitutional Facially and as Applied and to Preclude their Application at Bar
11/25/2009 Motion
to Declare Florida Statutes 921.141(5)(I) Unconstitutional and to Preclude its Use in the Present Case
11/25/2009 Memorandum
of Law in Support of Motion to Declare Florida Statutes 921.141(5)(I) Unconstitutional and to Preclude its Use in the Present Case
11/25/2009 Motion
to Declare Florida Statute 921.141(5)(L) Unconstitutional Facially and as Applied, and to Preclude its Use in the Case at Bar
11/25/2009 Memorandum
of Law in Support of Defendant’s Motion to Declare Florida Statute 921.141(5)(L) Unconstitutional Facially and as Applied, and to Preclude its Use in the Case at Bar
11/25/2009 Motion
(Defendant’s) for a Statement of Particulars Providing Notice of Aggravating Circumstances
11/25/2009 Memorandum
of Law in Support of Defendant’s Motion for a Statement of Particulars Providing Notice of Aggravating Circumstances
11/25/2009 Other
Table of Exhibits in Support of Defendant’s Motion for a Statement of Particulars Providing Notice of Aggravating Factors
11/25/2009 Memorandum
of Law in Support of Defendant’s Objection to the Standard Jury Instruction on Reasonable Doubt
11/25/2009 Objection
Written Objection to the Standard Jury Instruction on Reasonable Doubt
11/25/2009 Other
Table of Exhibits for Defendant’s Written Objection to the Standard Jury Instruction on Reasonable Doubt
11/25/2009 Motion
to Declare 921.141(5)(M) Unconstitutional Facially and as Applied (Victim Vulnerable Due to Age, Disability, or Familial or Custodial Authority)
11/25/2009 Memorandum
of Law in Support of Motion to Declare 921.141(5)(M) Unconstitutional Facially and as Applied (Victim Vulnerable Due to Age, Disability, or Familial or Custodial Authority)
11/25/2009 Motion
to Declare 921.141 Florida Statutes Unconstitutional Because it Improperly Shifts Burdens of Proof to the Defendant, Thereby Creating a Presumption of Death
11/25/2009 Motion
to Prohibit any Reference to the Jury’s Role at the Penalty Phase Being ‘Advisory’ or to the Jury’s Penalty Verdict as Being a ‘Recommendation’
11/25/2009 Memorandum
of Law in Support of Defendant’s Motion to Prohibit any Reference to the Jury’s Role at the Penalty Phase as Being ‘Advisory’ or to the Jury’s Penalty Verdict as Being a ‘Recommendation’
11/25/2009 Exhibit(s)
in Support of Motion to Prohibit any Reference to the Jury’s Role at the Penalty Phase Being ‘Advisory’ or to the Jury’s Penalty Verdict as Being a ‘Recommendation’
11/25/2009 Motion
to Declare Florida Statute 921.141 Unconstitutional Due to its Failure to Narrow the Scope of the Death Penalty
11/25/2009 Memorandum
of Law in Support of Motion to Declare Florida Statute 921.141 Unconstitutional Due to its Failure to Narrow the Scope of the Death Penalty
11/25/2009 Motion
for Jury Instructions Correctly Defining “Premeditation”
11/25/2009 Memorandum
Accompanying Motion for Jury Instructions Correctly Defining “Premeditation”
@Jeansee
All of these motions are standard motions filed in Death Penalty cases. They are necessary to preserve constitutional objections in the event the United States Supreme Court later decides that certain death penalty procedures are unconstitutional.
However, the Statement of Particulars should have been filed a long time ago. It will help enlighten us as to what exactly the State’s theory is behind the First Degree Murder charge.
I looked at overviews of Ring v Arizona and Apprendi v New Jersey, and it would not appear that Florida DP Law is in violation of the defendant’s rights to have aggravating circumstances determined by a jury as part of their recommendation, and that the judge is free to consider prior bad acts and/or enhance sentencing if aggravating circumstances are present, etc. My questions. Do you agree that Florida Law is Constitutionally sound? Can the defense file an immediate appeal if the judge denies the motions? Would such an appeal delay the proceedings? And, do you think the latest complection of the US Supreme Court could potentially further expand the rights of defendants in DP cases?
Since Kronk does not fit the description given of the nanny I am visiting different blogs in my search for a “10″. Female, mid twenties, long dark hair. A perfect 10. Please come out and show yourselfs, Bozo and company would like to drag you through their mud pit next.
We will never know exactly when or how Lacy Petersen died. But her husband was rightly convicted of her murder and sentenced to death. I believe bozo’s claim that we do not know the manner or exact location or time of caylee’s death does not mean skanky is innocent. He wants us to believe that just because we don’t know these things then his client must be innocent. This is BS and he knows it.